Hydro Differential pressure exchange over unity system.

[conradelektro]

Red-Sunset wrote:

-----------------------------------
Postscript: 
The underlying main reason that these odds here, stems from a basic misunderstanding of terms under which Wayne revealed his invention on this forum.  Wayne made it very clear at the very beginning that he came to share novel inventive but selective concepts and that he would not reveal all details of his invention to protect his IP,  he is not educating competitors.  This is supported by the simple inverted cup video's
Neither did he come to the forum to seek any validation approval for his invention.
He stated to have come to this forum to share knowledge (item#1 only) and he clearly said that OU was not the objective of his revelations as related to his invention (it was said that his system generated a excess output without you having to put in an energy fuel, OU was not a consideration)
   -----------------------------------

Strange declarations like this "Postscript" are the clearest indications that we are in the realm of psychology. This is not science, this is the most undesired double talk one can encounter. If someone talks to me like this face to face in real life, out he goes by the door. Such two tongued creatures only come close to me once.

Here in this forum strange creatures can loiter, because OU is by nature on the fringe of society. One has to give leeway. But one does not have to approve.

Greetings, Conrad

[Red_Sunset]

Strange declarations like this "Postscript" are the clearest indications that we are in the realm of psychology. This is not science, this is the most undesired double talk one can encounter. If someone talks to me like this face to face in real life, out he goes by the door. Such two tongued creatures only come close to me once.
Here in this forum strange creatures can loiter, because OU is by nature on the fringe of society. One has to give leeway. But one does not have to approve.
Greetings, Conrad 

Do yourself a favor, you understand english, then read from the beginning of this forum with comprehension (start at page #1)
This is something Tinsel has to learn too.

[Red_Sunset]

..................................................... Try to prove me wrong (something that I welcome and encourage and challenge every one of my detractors with) ..... and you will find yourself alone, because nobody has done that yet.

I wouldn't blow my trumpet too loud of I was you.
TinselKoala, I haven't seen you proving anything, only making demands.  From a gambling viewpoint, the odds for proclaiming "this can never work", is then easy when the odd are predominantly against OU  in a big way.(as seamus stated, no takers for the last 200years"), Sure this makes betting against OU is obvious very lucrative.  I don't see much smartness in that, only  a opportunistic disposition.

So a better forum name would be 'OU-Debunking.com' instead of 'OVERUNITY.COM' site.
Interesting

[powercat]

Powercat-

IIRC,  Wayne was speaking about a single ZED with 3 layers  vs. Two Zeds in tandem, each with 3 layers.

Tom

Hi Tom,
thanks for that, I found another quote that seems more specific, I still can't understand why any replications
have not shown overunity.
Quote from: mrwayne on August 08, 2012, 03:48:39 PM
Be warned - you need three layers to have robust over unity - 5 and 6 layers are the best numbers of layers.
The two layer model was only 104% efficient upstroke - a simple capture method to use the exhaust will boost that
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Red_Sunset]

AN CIVILIZED EXEMPLARY MODEL OF A SKEPTIC RESPONSE

« Reply #5 on: September 01, 2012, 10:44:11 AM »
I really hate to be the one raining on this parade, but this idea won't work, and here's why.
blah.......blah.....................blah

Never seen any skeptic response in this thread presented in this way, WHY !!